

Not sure I follow - both the Xbox Ally X & Steam Deck have touchscreens.
Not sure I follow - both the Xbox Ally X & Steam Deck have touchscreens.
Yeah, and if it weren’t for the techbro nonsense, it would be tossed onto the pile of mathematical curios that don’t have nontrivial uses.
The thing is - we often do find uses for those curiosities years later.
In the mean time, I wouldn’t mind if a decentralized video game came along where game assets were decentralized, distributed by bittorrent, and player assets were decentralized and tracked by blockchain.
Much the same as blockchain - it could have been exciting and fun, but it was immediately put to work to exploit people, and in the end that’s what the tools effectively were.
Working on it …
I’ll agree to that.
And I also think that there’s no way I trust Alphabet (holding company of Google) to be the sole arbiters of who gets to run code - neither in a philosophical sense nor as a gatekeeper to one top five compute platforms used by a substantial chunk of the world population.
It absolutely does not justify creating a policy that would wholesale obliterate F-Droid, arguably one of their larger competitors.
The whole value in searching is to get me to primary sources in a reasonably efficient way. Everything about AI is inserting extra middle men. I just don’t understand how anyone tolerates it.
It’s pretty much indisputably better for security.
I dispute this. While adding extra layers of security looks good on paper, flawed security can be worse than no security at all.
Android packages already have to be signed to be valid and those keys already are very effective in practice. In effect these new measures are reinventing the wheel as to what a layperson would think this new system does.
Adding this extra layer in fact has no actual security benefit beyond posturing/“deterrence”. Catching a perpetrator is not the same thing as preventing a crime. Worse - catching a thief in meatspace has the potential to recover stolen goods, but not so in digital spaces - either the crime is damage or destruction of data for which no punishment undoes the damage or the crime is sharing private data which in practice would almost certainly have been immediately fenced to multiple data brokers.
And were only getting started with this security theater:
But you know what would be even better for security?
While we’re at it we could add the tropes of removing network connectivity, or switch to using clay tablets kept in a wooden box guarded by a vengeful god. Both of those would be more secure, too.
Users should be allowed to do insecure things with their devices
100% agree with you here - it’s fundamentally the principle of “Your liberty to swing your fist ends just where my nose begins”. Users should be given the tools and freedom to do as they want with their property - up until it affects another person or their property in an unwanted way.
That was fundamentally F-Droid’s retort.
Any positive integer (or rational or real, technically) number is too many.
I’m both galled and exhausted by how modern companies wield ‘intellectual property’.
Ah, yes, the classic …
noise and keyboard
moist and keyboard
morse and keyboard
Re: edit
Yes! Embrace the typo. Elevate it to art!
The only reason I’ve never canceled is because I’ve never subscribed.
But I wish I had something to cancel in protest of the egregious 1st amendment violations.
Hard disagree - the point is a decade ago there wasn’t enough Linux market share for bad actors to target Linux. Proton is a compatibility layer, which while technically being a sandbox, it isn’t designed around security the way a browser sandbox is. It would not be hard for a virus embedded in a made-for-windows program to identify that it’s actually a proton sandbox, then deploy a Linux-specific payload (assuming the malware designer gave it some forethought for that situation). Heck - there’s plenty of viruses that do their work in scripting languages that don’t care what OS you’re running on.